Comments on: Senator Suggests National Speed Limit

Virginia Republican John Warner Said Congress May Want To Consider Move To Save Gas

[nordeck52]

REMEMBER!! Obama is just the "presumptive" Democratic Candidate. The Super Delegates, who can change their votes right up until the last minute, can still make Hillary Clinton the Democratic Candidate at the Democratic National Convention in August.

Posted by JTait2 at 12:57 PM : Jul 04, 2008


That''s not democracy, though. And you''re spamming by putting that comment on a page about trying to save gas. Besides, Hillary conceded from the race and withdrew, so she''s no longer running, technically. Stop being a sore loser.


As to the idea of reinstating a national speed limit, I think it''s a good idea, IF it''s actually feasible and will produce any clear cuts on gas prices. I can''t speak about any possible successes of the previous national speed limit, as it was WAY before my time, but it sounds like a good idea to me.

[samthetvcat]

---"I average driving about 500 miles per week. So with an improvement from 21 to 28 mpg my fuel costs dropped $24/week. I didn''''t hypermile or make any other changes. I just drove the speed limit. It only added a couple minutes on to my commutes. Imagine applying this to 100 million drivers. It is about the only weapon in our arsenal in the short term."---
Posted by elz523

That''s impressive! I''ve never heard of hypermiling before, but they just did a story on it on CNN and Miles O''Brien was getting a car started Fred Flintstone style with foot power. If the situation gets so bad that we go back to cave-man style that''s going to be so sad LOL

But driving the limit is a reasonable compromise - mostly I stick to limits to avoid getting ticketed to make sure my insurance stays low. But people can be so hostile when you play by the rules! Wow! Sometimes I do hurry up just to keep up with the flow because I''m scared of the road rage, so I''d feel really happy if everybody came down to 55 :)

[mdmo1]

I have a suggests fire congess. all thay say we cant dill. ***.

[cbsfan73]

Try the math on a 300 mile trip...
You speak of speed as dangerous, the freeways were designed for cars to drive 70 because that WAS the limit when they were built, cars today unlike the 60''''s counterarts have airbags, anti lock brakes etc but in a head-on with a drunk driver you are as dead at 65 as you are at 55.
Slower speeds mean more TIME of exposure on the road to other drivers and hazzards, you cant simply go by speed you have to factor in time of EXPOSURE, and every minute of exposure carries risk, the less minutes you expose yourself and car on the roads the less risk there is of being hit or hitting someone else, the less risk there is of hitting a deer or a down tree.

Posted by Newster1

1. Very few people take 300 mile trips - especially nowadays. Even so, listen to an audio book or enjoy the scenery.

2. The interstates were designed for 70 MPH with with only 1/3 of the traffic now on the road. Moreover, statistics from the Drive 55 period show less fatalities by percentage.

3. EXPOSURE is not so important as REACTION TIME. Your logic is like saying if you run for a certain distance in a rainstorm you will not get as wet. Either walking and having more exposure or running and crashing into more rain drops - the result is the same coverage. As far as hitting deer, everyone knows that driving faster lowers reaction time and increases the chance of hitting a deer.

[marcpcbs]

newster1
I think you missed the point. The point is, Long trip - Short trip, the % are the same. Also the numbers are overwhelming. Driving slower saves thousands of lives. There are no other points to be made here.

[ubrew12]

So, basically, to preserve the right of SOME idiots to buy Hummers and other gas guzzling monstrosities...

the REST of us are going to have to slow down to 55???

People, the auto companies sold you on gas-guzzling SUV''s because they were on truck beds and so were LEGALLY trucks and our nations gas-mileage laws didn''t apply to them. Ten years and billions of tanks of gas later, and WE''RE ALL GOING TO HAVE TO SLOW DOWN because you bought into that idiocy??

***

[marcpcbs]

Posted by omega39
"Senator Suggests National Speed Limit

We can start slowing people down by using our useless representatives as speed bumps."

Now that%u2019s what I like to hear, well thought out, good positive and constructive suggestions.

Thank you omega39

[omega39-2009]

Senator Suggests National Speed Limit

We can start slowing people down by using our useless representatives as speed bumps.

[nothappyatall]

Driving 70 MPH for 15 minutes will carry you 17.5 miles.
Driving 55 for 15 minutes will carry you 13.75 miles
Total savings: 3 minutes and 45 seconds.

Posted by cbsfan73

Nice try, but most people drive more than 15 minutes, if all you are driving is 15 minutes then chances are you are only driving locally to the store IN TOWN going more like 35 than 70, or you are driving a secondary road one lane either direction which is normally only 55 everywhere ANYWAY.

Try the math on a 300 mile trip on the FREEWAY which is where most people would be driving on a trip out of their town.
At 55 mph it would take 5-1/2 hours to drive about 300 miles, at 70 mph it would take 4 hours to drive 280 miles, so around 4 hours and 20 minutes for the same trip that would take an hour and ten minutes longer at 55.
You speak of speed as dangerous, the freeways were designed for cars to drive 70 because that WAS the limit when they were built, cars today unlike the 60''s counterarts have airbags, anti lock brakes etc but in a head-on with a drunk driver you are as dead at 65 as you are at 55.
Slower speeds mean more TIME of exposure on the road to other drivers and hazzards, you cant simply go by speed you have to factor in time of EXPOSURE, and every minute of exposure carries risk, the less minutes you expose yourself and car on the roads the less risk there is of being hit or hitting someone else, the less risk there is of hitting a deer or a down tree.

[nothappyatall]

55 mph DID WORK IN THE 70s!!! It saved fuel

and even more importantly, thousands of lives.
Posted by JTait2"

FINE, they *YOU* drive 55 and save 2 cents worth of gas, it only helped in 1974 because cars back then being driven were 1960''s 8 cylinder 4 bb;l carb muscle cars and land barges like the Plymouth Fury ll, Cadillac Coup De Ville, Mustang, Chevy 350 and bigger, and Ford big block engines with max horse power because that''s what people wanted back then- POWER.
Carburator controlled engines wasted a lot of fuel, especially when the automatic choke wasn''t set right or the manual choke was left on by accident.

NOW cars are all fuel injected, computer controlled engines, usually 4, or 6 cyl''s and get around 300% MORE mpg''s then their 1960''s counterparts.

[cbsfan73]

There is tons of evidence that the Drive 55 campaign worked with regards to both safety and energy savings. It%u2019s easy to realize that driving slower reduces vehicle wear and tear, gasoline consumption, fatalities, and stress.

The real kicker is when you do the math:

Driving 70 MPH for 15 minutes will carry you 17.5 miles.
Driving 55 for 15 minutes will carry you 13.75 miles
Total savings: 3 minutes and 45 seconds.

A person can%u2019t save time %u2013 it still goes by. Americans spend time trying to reallocate time. Americans are clock slaves that are too ignorant to slow down and simply enjoy being alive. We are a pathetic society indeed.

If that measly amount of time is so critical, you need to take a long, hard look at both the head setting on your shoulders and the life you are sacrificing.

[nothappyatall]

here is no reason to mow any further from the pavement than 3 feet, and the fuel, animal, and accident death costs of mowing that are far higher than any costs associated with stopping all mowing along highways.

Posted by delfmast
Wrong, there is fire danger and other reasons for mowing medians and roadsides, including the obstructions of tall weeds and grass. People throw lighted cigs out the window, LOTS of fires start by the side of the roads.

They are not wasting diesel needed by farmers! there is NO SHORTAGE of fuel and whether the mowers use the fuel or not isnt going to change the price, even the Saudi''s announcing an increase in production and the news announcing Iraq oil will hit the market too has done nothing but INCREASE the prices!
Farmers are raking in the bucks with corn for ethanol, time to remove the subsidies now.

[marcpcbs]

nojoy01 says today%u2019s oil prices are a simple case of supply and demand. This would imply that China''s oil consumption has doubled in the last ten months.

I doubt it.

There%u2019s more going on here than just increased demand can explain. Its probably a combination of influences including a group of oil speculators not caring at all how bad they impact this countries economy.

I believe that over half of this huge price increase is because Americans are robbing Americans.

It''s been said that if America found it could financially profit from it''s own destruction, it would blow it''s self up. I believe that what were experiencing.

[nothappyatall]

Drivers ALWAYS have the choice and option on the roads to drive 55 IF THEY WANT TO instead of 65, that''s what the right hand SLOW LANE is for.

"I would like to know why cars are most fuel efficient at 55 mph. Must be a conspiracy with manufacturers. It is time to have better designs, not to mention different fuel.

Posted by shippg "

It has to do with wind and rolling resistance, but todays'' cars are very streamlined compared to the 1960''s brick-front vehicles. You feel the additional load required if you ride a bike at different speeds, the faster you go the more pedal power it takes, its exponential, if it takes "X" amount of pedal power to go 10mph it does not take 3 times "X" to go 30mph it''s more like 4 or 5 times, and as you increase that speed it takes even more.

In today''s car you''d save more gas just having your tires properly inflated, tuned up engine and not flooring the pedal to start up from a light, coasting to a stop etc- any of those would save 1 or 2%

[talk2chief]

Where are the long lines of cars waiting to fuel up their cars???? There is no fuel shortage. Only oil speculators and big oil profits. The proposal is a sham to have you believe their is a shortage while oil lobbyists line the pockets of crooked senators.

[nothappyatall]

"Congress in 1974 set a national 55 mph speed limit because of energy shortages caused by the Arab oil embargo."

Later found to be the OIL COMPANIES were part of it creating artificial shortages to drive up the price.


"Studies that showed the 55 mph speed limit saved 167,000 barrels of oil a day, or 2 percent of the country''s highway fuel consumption,"

BFD!! 2% is NOTHING, the US population increases by more than that every year, and most of those people are or will be driving CARS, any 2% savings is totally eliminated in a year.
1974 drivers were mostly driving cars made in the SIXTIES that probably averaged 12 mpg, TODAY''S cars are not going to see much if any fuel savings 65 to 60 or 55, I suggest the Senator who suggested this be strung up as a moron.

[shippg-2009]

I would like to know why cars are most fuel efficient at 55 mph. Must be a conspiracy with manufacturers. It is time to have better designs, not to mention different fuel.

[ray999999]

how about Sen. John Warner, R-Va take a pay cut or shut-up

[nojoy01]

Ok people, listen up. What is going on with the fuel prices is called "supply & demand". More people trying to buy the product than there is product to go around. We are NOT going to be able to drill, conserve, high tech, bully, beg, plead, borrow, or steal our way around that simple fact. No, the only alternative I can see, other than nobody using cars anymore, is to reduce the number of people (consumers) that are competing for the dwindling stocks of crude oil. My suggestion is that the CIA, MI-5, the Mossad, & the former KGB all get together and manufacture, an "andromeda strain" type incident in China and India. Poof. With over Two Billion consumers eliminated it would certainly bring down the cost of oil because there would be fewer people demanding it. Now, if you''re too squeamish to apply that solution to the problem, I have only one suggestion. GET USED TO IT. The price of gasoline is going to go up. Period. All of your whining, all of the politicians'' posturing, all of the mumbo-jumbo horse manure about "alternative energy sources" isn''t going to make one bit of difference as long as Six--Hundred--Million plus (with more being added every day) cars in the world today driven by people who think they should be able to get into their car, by themselves (mostly), and go when they want, where they want, because they want to. GET USED TO IT. GET OVER IT. AND FOR PITYS SAKE, STOP WHINING ABOUT IT LIKE IT''S EVERYBODY ELSES'' FAULT BUT YOU ARE BLAMELESS.

[mark46n]

Driving has already become a head ache because of fuel prices but now they want to add more time to the already painful commute. I will be letting my Florida Congressman know that if he votes for any lowering of the speed limit he wont be getting my vote.